Talk:Kaprekar numbers: Difference between revisions
→Issue the second
Line 259:
* Sept 18 -- After reviewing your version, which I found to be both incorrect and badly written, I undid you changes and posted why on the talk page.
** You responded with the "hot air" comment and stated I should have fixed your code.
::Again wrong in fact. Ledrug replaced your version at 04:55, 19 September 2012, I responded to your explanation at 18:44, 19 September 2012 (UTC). I accepted that you had undone the changes and explained why I had made them. No mention of 'hot air', the response finished with A mute point now as ledrug has done tha task properly. You made a long response on 23 September. 26th September I responded with "A lot of hot air for somthing that doesn't exist!". If you thought, and I agree with you, that "Ledrug (had already) submitted a single version that was faster than mine (Larry), well-written, and worked for all number bases" what is there to discuss. Only if you resurect and improve your version is the subject interesting--[[User:Nigel Galloway|Nigel Galloway]] 13:05, 8 October 2012 (UTC)
*later, Ledrug submitted a single version, which he later updated with the mod filter, that was faster than mine, well-written, and worked for all number bases.
** I believe Ledrug's current version is the best CL implementation of the task and should be the only version UNLESS someone using the code change criteria has valid reasons for changing it. --[[User:Lhignight|Larry Hignight]] 03:49, 8 October 2012 (UTC)
::Why only one version? There are four ways to implement this task.--[[User:Nigel Galloway|Nigel Galloway]] 13:05, 8 October 2012 (UTC)
The problem is that ledrug replaced Larrys solution to, in ledrug's description "reduce code; simplify; speed up; conform to task and extra improve silly logic". This has made Larry angry, I think with the wrong person.
Line 269:
I would prefer that ledrug did not so overwrite someone elses work, but Larry seemed more interested in pointless abuse of me than improving and justifying his solution. Anyway I had a better idea.
:Unbelievable. I wrote valid criticisms about the CORRECTNESS and READABILITY of the changes that YOU made to my submission. Something that you seem incapable of responding to in a professional manner. --[[User:Lhignight|Larry Hignight]] 03:49, 8 October 2012 (UTC)
::Larry, how old are you? You have accepted that "Ledrug submitted a single version, which he later updated with the mod filter, that was faster than mine, well-written, and worked for all number bases." You have agreed that he replaced your version to "reduce code; simplify; speed up; conform to task and extra". Does this not imply that your code needed improving? I am not interested in your critisism of me, though when it degenerates to "Well said. He is clearly more interested in being a pompous dick then contributing quality code to RC" I don't think it is acceptable.--[[User:Nigel Galloway|Nigel Galloway]] 13:05, 8 October 2012 (UTC)
==== Issue the third ====
| |||